58th Congress, \ SENATE. j Report 

Jd Sessw?i. \ ] No. 4388. 

EXTENSION AND COMPLETION 

OF THE 

CAPITOL BUILDING. 



REPORT OF THE JOINT COMMISSION. 



March 2, 1905.— Ordered to be printed. 



WASHINGTON: 
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 

1905. 



11 JAM 1S06 

b 0» J. 



EXTENSION AND COMPLETION OF THE 
CAPITOL BUILDING. 



Ir. Wetmoke, from the Joint Commission, submitted the following 

REPORT. 

[Relative to plan.s for the extension and completion of the Capitol Iniilding.] 

The Joint Commission established b}' the sundry civil act of April 
28, 1904, to inquire and report on plans for the extension aiid comple- 
tion of the Capitol building-, beg leave to report. 

The sundry civil appropriation act of April 28, 1904, contains the 
following provision: 

A joint conimigsion composied of three Senators, namely, Honoral)le George P. Wet- 
more, of Rhode Island, Honorable Russell A. Alger, of Michigan, and Honorable 
Arthur P. Gorman, of Maryland, and three members of the House of Representatives 
of the Fifty-eighth Congress, namely. Honorable Joseph G. Cannon, of Hlinois. Honor- 
able William P. Hepburn, of Iowa, and Honorable James D. Richardson, of Tennes- 
see, which is hereby created, is authorized to inquire and report to Congress at its 
next session plans in detail and estimates of cost for the extension and comj)letion of 
the Capitol building, in accordance with the original plans therefor by the late Thomas 
U. Walter, with such moditications thereof as they may deem advantageous or neces- 
sary, and for each and every purpose connected therewitli, including the employment 
of such professional and other services as they may deem requisite, and for such other 
expenses as said joint connnission may authorize or incur, there is hereby appropriated 
the sum of fifty thousand dollars, or so much thereof as may be necessary; and the 
Superintendent of the Capitol P>uilding and Grounds, under the direction and su]>er- 
vision of said commission, or such connnission as shall be authorized by Congress, shall 
conduct the making of all contracts for said construction, whenever and not before the 
same shall be authorized by Congress, after proper advertisements and the reception 
of bids, and said superintendent, subject to the direction and approval of such com- 
mission, shall employ such professional and personal services in connection with said 
work, when autliorizeti as aforesaid, as may be necessary. Any vacancy occurring by 
resignatioi>or otherwise in the membership of said connnission shall be tilled l)y the 
presiding officer of the Senate or House, at-cording as the vacancy occurs in tlie Senate 
or House representation on said connnission. 



2 EXTENSION AND COMPLETION OF THE CAPITOL BUILDING. 

The Joint Commission as constituted by the act met on April 30, 
1904, and oro-anized by the election of Hon. Georo-e P. ^^'etmore, 
of Rhode Island, as chairman. 

The firm of Carrere & Hastino\s, architects, of New York City, were 
appointed consultino- architects to the Joint Commission, with instruc- 
tion to study the problem inv^olved and submit preliminary desio-ns 
and also the necessar}^ complete plans and estimates contemplated in 
the act creating- the Joint Connuission, the same to be based on the 
plan for an extension of the central east front of the Capitol, designed 
by the late Thomas U. Walter and dated Februarj^ 20, 1865. 

The consulting- architects were also requested to consider and report 
on the question of — 

(1) Refacing with white marble such portions of the present west 
front of the Capitol as are now l)uilt in sandstone, preserving- the pres- 
ent design ; 

(2) Replacing with white marble the two broad Hights of terrace 
steps on the west of the Capitol; and 

(3) Placing a sculptural group in the House pediment to correspond 
in character, size, and finish with the sculjitural work now existing in 
the pediment of the Senate wing. 

The architects were directed to report as their work progressed, 
and during the past summer and autumn meetings of the Commission 
were held to receive and consider preliminary reports. 

Under authority of the sundry civil act of March 3, li*03. the Super- 
intendent of the Capitol Building and Grounds had constructed a 
plaster model of the Capitol l)uilding as it exists to-day. with movable 
sections showing two of the three plans of the late Thomas U. Walter 
for an extension of the central east front. The Conmiission has had 
constructed in addition models illustrating the designs submitted l)y 
the consulting architects. 

At a meeting of the Connuission on February l!», 11K)5, the con- 
sulting architects submitted their repoi't (Appendix A). They recom- 
mend the adoption of a plan marked "Scheme A" as being in their 
opinion the most conservative and in every way the best solution of 
the architectural problems involved in correcting the defects of the 
east favade, to which Mr. Walter called attention in his report of 1805. 

Scheme A provides for moving the entire central east front forward 
only so far as necessar}- (12 feet 10 inches) to bring the main wall of 
the building at the center, under the extreme projection of the Dome, 
and give the Dome the ap[)arent support which it should have, at 
the same time adding one colunni on each side of the central pedi- 
ment, broadening the pediment accordingly, so that it will dominate 
the two pediments of the Senate and House wings, it also- proposes 
to reproduce the present east front in white marblt\ In this seheme 
no consideration has been given to increased space within the l)uildin-. 



EXTENSION AND COMPLETION OF THE CAPITOL BUILDING. 6 

Ncvortheless, the moving of the wall easterh' 12 feet 10 inches gives on 
the main floor to the east of the Supreme Court a series of alcoves, 
back of the present screen, for retiring or robing rooms, and a similar 
series of alcoves to the east of Statuary Hall, as well as on tlfe floor 
above. In the basement this additional projection would add to the 
size of the adjacent rooms, enlarging and improving them, especiall}^ 
in the case of the law li])rar3', under the Supreme Court, In the 
central section of the l)uilding two spacious rooms are obtained on 
either side of the main entrance, with windows opening on the portico, 
giving 12 additional rooms for committee or other purposes, those on 
the tirst and second floors being well lighted and all very accessible. 
The estimated cost of Scheme A is ^800,000. 

The architects also submitted an alternative plan, Scheme B, as 
illustrating what the}" believe to be the least objectionable manner in 
which the central east front can be extended for the purpose of secur- 
ing any considerable room space within the building. 

In Scheme B the central portion is projected 32 feet 6 inches easterlj^ 
from the walls of the Supreme Court and Statuarj'.Hall, a wide cor- 
ridor east of the Rotunda, connecting the Senate and House wings, is 
provided, and the building will gain 54 large rooms, 18 on each of 
the three floors. The estimated cost of Scheme B is $1,075,000. 

The Joint Conmiission recommends the adoption by Congress of — 

(1) Scheme A, as to the extension of the central east front of the 
Capitol: 

(2) Also recommends the refacing Avith white marble such portions of 
the present west front as are now built of sandstone, the present design 
to be reproduced in every detail; 

(?)) Replacing with white iuar])le the two broad flights of steps on the 
west of the Capitol from the upper terrace to the foot of the embank- 
ment where the garden begins; and 

(4) Placing a sculptural group in the House pediment to correspond 
in character, size, and flnish with the sculptural work now existing. in 
the pediment of the Senate wing. 

The estimated cost will thus be: 

East front extension, Scheme A« $800, 000 

Reproducing the west front in white marble 425,000 

Reproducing west terrace steps in white marble 50, 000 

Sculptural treatment of the east pediment of the House wing 55, 000 

Total 1, 330, 000 

A statement of the expenses of the Commission to date is attsiched 
hereto, marked Appendix H. 
Geo. Peabody Wetmore, C/iairnian. fJ. (1. Cannon. 
R. A. Alger. W. P. Hepburn. 

A. P. Gorman. James D. Richardson. 

« See Appendix A. 



APPENDIX A. 

liEPOlIT ON THE EXTENSION AND COMl^LETION OF THE 
UNITED STATES CAPITOL, 1904. 



To the Joint Comm!if.tli>n of the Se)ia(e un<l lloaxe for the E.c/enxion. ond Completion of the 

United S'tdtes Capitol Building: 

Gentlkmkn: We feel deeply the responsil)ility imposed upon us in reporting to 
your Commission in regard to any changes to be made in the Capitol l)uildin<jr of the 
"United States, a building so interesting from the artistic as well as from the historic 
point of view, and which, though it may have some architectural faults, is, never- 
theless, one of the most monumental and beautiful edifices in this country. We find 
ourselves, therefore, hesitating whether we should advise the reprochiction of the 
east front of the building in marble to harmonize with the rest of tlie Capitol, pre- 
serving the design practically as it exists to-day, or whether we should recommend 
enlarging the building in accordance with Mr. Walter's j)lans of 18(55. 

In his report as Architect of the Capitol extension, dated November 1, 1864, he 
states: 

"Xow that the new Dome and the wings of the Capitol are a])proaching comple- 
tion, it must be apparent to everynne that the extension of tlie center building on 
the east to the line of the new wings becomes an architectural nec-essity. 1 have 
therefore prepared plans for thus completing the work in harmony with what has 
already been done, and will place them in the Cai)itol for future reference. 

" I do not suppose, nor would I recommend, that any action be taken by Congress 
in reference to such an improvement until the war is ended and the financial con- 
dition of the country becomes settled and prosperous; but inasmuch as it is my pur- 
pose to retire from these works as soon as the Dome is iinished, I deem it incumbent 
upon me to leave upon record my views as to their linal completion." 

When wc read this report accomjianying his plans of lS(i5 we were impressed with 
the feeling that Mr. Walter had been influenced, perhaps under pressure from Con- 
gress, by the desire to obtain increased accommodations within the building, and 
that he would have recommended a somewhat different treatment if he had had 
under consideration only the strictly architectural necessities of the design. We feel 
very sure that it would be better to reproduce the i)resent design in marble, as nearly 
as possible, as it now stands than to carry out Mr. Walter's plans of 18(i5 in their 
entirety. 

It seems remarkal)le, when considerins the history of this buildng. that so beauti- 
ful and harmonious a design should have residtcd from the successive additions made 
to the original building, the result of which is certainly a monument to the skill of 
IMr. Walter. Whatever faults there may be in the design are distinctly the outcome 
of the linutations which were imposed upon the architect in adapting the new con- 
ditions to the building as it then existed. The Dome had to be designed in propor- 
tion to the enlarged building, and yet Mr. Walter found himself compelled to place 
this larger Dome upon the masonry foundations and walls of the smaller Dome. 
Owing to the fact that the foundations were l>uilt on most unfavorable soil, he very 
naturally hesitated to a<ld upon these walls any unnece.'^sary ma.«onry weight or to 
disturi) in any way the existing masonry where it could be used and adapted to the 
new t'onditions. He felt very strongly, however, as we do, the defect that on the 
east front the Dome does not ap]>ear to be supported; in fact, it overhangs tiie wall 
of the Iniilding and seems to rest partly upon the portico. He was right in wishing 
to have this defect corrected and, also, in wishing to add another column on either 

5 



6 EXTENSION AND COMPLETION OF THE CAPITOL BUILDING. 

!^iile of the (.'entral motive on tlie ea^^t i'lunt of the huil(Hnu', tluis increasino; the width 
ol the pediment and making the central motive with its pediment predominate over 
tlietwo wings witii tlieir pediments. While we feel, therefore, that the ihrect ele- 
vation of the east front of the Capitol recommended l)y Mr. Walter siiould l)e car- 
ried out in every respect, we are at the same time certain that could Mr. Walter 
have given more time and further study to this great i)roblem, unhampered by prac- 
tical limitations, he would have been linalh' persuaded not to ]>roject the central 
building with its pe<liment any farther east than a])solutely nece.«sary to give the 
Dome the ajipareut supi)ort which it now lacks. 

In oiu- judgment, one of the most impressive views of the Capitol is obtained when 
one sees the entire east front and the Dome together, which is only po.s.sible while 
standing fairly chtse to the l)uilding and to the east of either the Senate or House 
wing. Now, if the central buililing were ])rought too far forward it would mask the 
Dome and destroy this very picturescpie and yet imposing view of the Capitol; and 
there would be no point from where the entire height of the Dome could be seen in 
its relation to the rest of the Iniilding, which is now possible on the east front. 

We also l)elieve that if this central building were carried far forward towanl the 
east, the architectural effect of the entire east front would be injured, even when 
considered without regard to the Dome. In a monumental .scheme of this cliaracter, 
three parts or architectural motives are much simpler, and a broader and better com- 
l)o.sition, than five jiarts. The extreme i)rojection of this central building would 
completely destroy the present composition of three units, with its l)readth and sim- 
l)licity, and would not only produce a (hvision with live mend^ers — the center, tlie 
two wings, and the intervening spaces — but would make these meuibers practically 
e(jual in size and architectural value. That such a composition already existing on 
the west front is, nevertheless, rather imposing is to be ascribed to the fact that the 
Cai)itol is always so greatly foreshortened by the jierspective, due to the fall of 
the land on the west — a result which could not be expected on the east front where 
the foreground is level and the building can be seen in close proximity. 

Another iuijiortant reason for not making this great projection is that it would 
de.stroy the court-like effect of the east front M'here the two wings project l)eyond 
the simple and broad central tmilding, one of the most ])ictures([ue and pleasing 
features of the (-^apitol wherever seen on the east, but especially when standing fairly 
clo.se to the building and looking up at the Dome. 

Lastly, it would seem most unfortunate not to be al)le, when looking diagonally 
toward this facade as one approaches from the north or from the south, to see the 
full length of the V)uilding as at present. The extreme projection of the central 
building would ])roduce this result, for it would ]iractically mask that i)art (.>f the 
building beyond it, so that 'vhen approaching the Capitol from the south one would 
see the Mouse wing and the central projection, while the Senate would be hidden 
from view by the projection of the central building'. The same would be true with 
regard to tlie House wing when approaching the building from the north. We are, 
therefore, strongly of the opinion that if Mr. Walter had been entirely unhampered 
by practical consiilerations, and if he had written his report after the comj)letion of 
the Dome and the two wings, he would have reached the same conclusion. 

In view of these (considerations, and after very careful study, we rt^spectfully sub- 
mit plan. Scheme A, as being, in our opinion, the most conservative anci in every 
way the best solution of tlie architectural i)ro])lems involved in correcting the defects 
of this favade, to which Mr. Walter called attention in his report of LS(>^. 

Realizing, as already stated, that the composition of this facade, and especially the 
relation of wall surfaces to each other, should ])e changed as little as possible, we 
have moved the entire front of the center portion forward, only so far as necessary 
to bring the main wall of the building, at the center, under the extreme projection 
of the Dome, and give the Dome the apparent support which it should have. At the 
same tim(\ we have added one column on each side of the main ])eiliment, broadening 
the iH'diment accordingly, so that it will ilominate the two pediments of the Senate 
and House wings, which Mr. Walter so strongly felt should be done. 

In this scheme no consideration has l)een given to increased space within the 
building, an(i the problem has been solved strictly according to the architectural 
necessities of the case; nevertheless, the moving of the wall easterly 12 feet 10 inches 
gives, on the main Hoor to the east of Statuary Hall, a series of alcoves which can l>e 
used to advantage for the additional storage of documents; and, to the east of the 
Supreme Court, a similar series of alcoves, back of the })resent .screen, for retiring or 
robing rooms forthe judges. Similar alcoves would also lie obtained, in both <'ases, 
on the Hoor alxive, which could be reachetl from the central jiortion of the building 
and used for various ])urposes. These changes would in no way affect any of the 
internal arrangements or even the decorations on the main door. 



EXTENSION AND COMPLETION OF THE CAPITOL BUILDING. 7 

In the baseiiieiit this additiuiuil iu'djectioii has aiMed to the si/e of the adjacent 
rooms, enlarging and improving them, especially in the ease of the law lihrary under 
the Supreme Court. 

In the central section of the building 2 spacious rooms are obtained on either 
side of the main entrance, with windows opening on to the portico, giving 12 addi- 
tional rooms for committee or other purposes, those on the lirst and second floors 
being well lighted and all very accessible. 

We strongly recommend that whatever alterations are decided upon should V)e sub- 
stantially in harmony with this ])lan. Scheme A, and that in no event should the 
central i)ortion of the building be made to project any farther eastward than shown 
thereon. 

We have pre[)ared an alternative ]>lan, Scheme B, partly to illustrate our conten- 
tion that the building should not be projec'ted further eastward than al)solutely 
necessary to give an apparent support to the Dome, and at the same time to show 
what, in our judguK'nt, is the least (il)jectionable manner, if the architectural beauty 
and simplicity of the east front are to be preserved, of obtaining additional space 
within the building while retaining to the greatest possible e.xtent the present char- 
acter of the east front. 

In Scheme B the central portion has been projected 32 feet 6 inches easterly from 
the walls of the Supreme C'ourt and Statuary Hall, adding to the building 14 spacious 
and well-lighted rooms on each door. 7 on each side of the main entrance. These 
rooms are approached by a corridor of ample width connecting with l)oth the Senate 
and House wings, the Rotunda, and other important circulations of the building. 
This corridor, l)esides giving the Senators and Congressmen direct access to their 
respective (-ommittee rooms, also i>rovides a new communication from one end of the 
Capitol to the other, which would be both private and convenient. 

In order to o))tain this tlirough corrider and at the same time avoid the deep- 
recessed courts which would then exist between the Senate wing and the central 
building en the one side of the House wing and the central building on the other, we 
have indicated on the plan, Scheme B, entirely new sections. Each of these new 
sections connecting the central building with the Senate and the House wings, would 
contain 4 additional large rooms on each floor, opening into a court, supplying light 
from the east to the present passages connecting the main building with the Senate 
an<l the House wings. The colonnade now existing at this point is moved forward 
to form the easterly facade of the new connecting sections. 

By reference to the plan it will Ije seen that under this scheme IS large well-lighted 
rooms are obtained on the main floor, and a similar number on the gallery floor, 
available for committee rooms or other ]>urposes. Eighteen corresjwnding rooms are 
obtained on the ground floor, some of which can be used for committee rooms and 
others for the services of the l^uilding. 

From the practical point of view, this plan commends itself to us very highly, as 
it i>rovides ample and well-lighted additional space without disturbing the present 
intt-rual arrangements of the building or its decorations. It estal)lishes, liesides, a 
new and important circulation l)etween the two wings, serving the different new 
committee rooms. It produces a more interesting and satisfactory fayade than could 
be obtained under the recommendation made by Mr. Walter in his report of 1S65. 
It would l)e simpler and more dignified, and would i)reserve the breadth and monu- 
mental character of the easterly fac/ade; but it would be much less interesting and 
picturesque. It would be such a great change from the present facade, so familiar 
to our people and which they have learned to love and venerate, that we make this 
.suggestion merely to meet the condition which has been imposeil uj)on us l)y your 
connnission of re])orting a scheme with added sjiace. We hope, nevertheless, that 
this alternative plan. Scheme B, will not be favorably considered. 

In order to facilitate the study of this' j)roblem by your comnnssion, we submit 
herewith a plan of the main floor of the laiited States Cajiitol and a large photo- 
graph of the east front, showing the building as it exists to-day; also a comjjlete 
elevation, at double the scale of the plans, showing the easterly facade as it would 
look in direct elevation with the greater width of the pediment obtained by the 
addition of one column on each side of the present pediment. Sketch perspectives 
and complete models of this facade are likewise sul)mitted, further illustrating 
Scheme .\, Scheme B, and the east front as it exists to-day. 

Li the preliminary estimates, which we ap])end to this leport, as retpiested by 
your committee, giving the cost involved in the execution of either of the schemes 
proposed, we have also included alternate estimates for refacing the present central 
Imilding of the east facade with white marble to correspond with the Senate and the 
House wings, the i)re.sent design being, of course, rejiroduced in every iletail. One 
estimate sul)mitted is for the reproductiou of the facade in every detail just as it 



8 EXTENSION AND COMPLETION OK THE CAPITOL HriLDINO. 

stands; the other includes the sn^^ested addition of two coiuiiuis and the widenin^t!^ 
of the east pediment, otlierwise rei)ro(hicin>i- tiie juvsent fai.ade. 

Estimates are also submitted, tirst, for tiie prohahle cost of a sculptural group in 
the House pediment to correspond in character, size, and finish with the sculjitural 
work now existing in the pediment of the Senate wing; and, second, for refacing 
with white marble such jiortions of the present west front as are now built in sand- 
stone, the present design being, of course, reproduced in every detail. 

In accordance with your request we also submit an estimate for replacing with 
white marble the two broad flights of steps on the west of the Capitol, from the 
upper terrace to the foot of the embankment where the garden begins. We are 
strongly of the opinion tliat an error of judgment was made in using a dark material 
for these steps, and that the ]>resent effect is most injurious to the general harmony, 
dignity, and repose of this iuipressive front. This work would not disturb any of 
the white marble ramps ami b:ilustrades, and coutemjilates only replatnng the blue- 
stone stei)S and platforms with white marble. 

In conclusion, we should state that during the study of this imi)ortant problem and 
the preparation of this report we have conferred from time t< i time with the Superin- 
tendent of the Capitol, and we are greatly indebted to him for his very valuable 
assistance. 

We have the honor to remain, very respectfully, your obedient servants, 

Carrere & Hastin(;s, 

('ovff'ultirifj ArcJiitfcts. 

New York, December 21, 1904. 



Estimate of Cost, United States Capitol Extension. 

The following estimates include in each case all laltor and material complete in 
place on the building. 

east front extension. 

Scheme A {12-fo<it 10-inch projecfion). 

Cut stone, including all steps (white marble) $590, 000 

Masonry and fireprooiing 100, 000 

Steel work 20, 000 

Eoofing ■ 15, 000 

All interior work , 75, 000 

800, 000 
tSchcme B {32-f'xA G-litch projection). 

Cut stone, including all steps (white marl)le) - !?6o5, OOO 

Masonrv and fireprootiug 200, 000 

Steel work 50, 000 

Roofing 80. 000 

A.11 interior work UiO. 000 

1,075,000 
Reproducrnfi present ecixt front in n'hite rniirhle niihont anji cliangeH. 

Cut stone, including all steps ( white marble) 8455, 000 

Masonrv ( entirel v new wall ) fiO, 000 

Roofing ' , 5. 000 

All interior work .' .SO, 000 

Sculpture 15, 000 

505, 000 

Reproducing present east fro)it in n-]tite niarljle; also adding tn-o eoluinus and increasing 

the iridth of jjcdiment. 

Cut stone, including all steps ( white marble) S450, 000 

IMasonrv (entirely new wall ) . . ^ 75. 000 

Rooting 5, 000 

All interior work 30, 000 

Sculpture 15, 000 

Total 575, 000 



EXTENSION AND COMPLETION OF THE CAPITOL BUILDING. 9 

lieproiluciiig prei^ent tvest front In white muvhle vithunl ani/ clianr/es. 

Cut stone, including all steps (white marble) s32o, 000 

Masonry (entirely new wall ) 65, 000 

Roofing ; 0, 000 

All interior work oO, 000 

Total 4:25,000 

■ Terrace Ktcps, west front. 

Marble steps 837, 000 

Removing old work 5, 000 

Masonry 8, 000 

Total 50, 000 

Sculptural treatment of the east pediment of the House wing, including the 
sculptor's honorarium for the model; supplying of the necessary marble, 
erected in place, and the execution of the carving from the artist's model. . 55, 000 

Respectfully submitted by — 

Cakrere & Hastings, 

Consult in g A rdi Itedf:. 
New York, December 27, 1904- 



ILLUSTRATIONS ACCOMPANYING 
APPENDIX A. 



11 



«i 






UNITED STATES CAPITOL 




PRESENT STATE 



COMPILED Blf I JARRERL t HASTINGS CONSULTING ARCHITECTS 



UNITED ST/OTES CAPITOL 

PROPOSED tXf ENSION OF THE EAST FRONT 
RECOMMENDED BY THOMAS U. WALTER IN 1565 WITH 
MODIFICATIONS SU GGESTED IN REPORT OF DEC. 27 1904 
BY CARRERE t HAST INGS CONSULTING ABCHITECTS 




SCHEME "A" 



UNITED ST/ffES CAPITOL 

PROPOSED EXTENSION OV THE EAST FRONT 
RECOMMCNOED DY THOMAS U. WALTER IN 1865 WITH 
MODIFICATIONS SUGGESTED IN RKPOFT OF DEC 27 1904 
BY CARRIRE t HASTINGS CONSULTING ARCHITECTS 




SCHEME "B" 



APPENDIX B. 

STATEMENT OF EXPEXDITIKES TO MARCH 2, 11)05. 



Johd ( \)mmhmrn , cxtermon and completion of the United litates Capitol. 





Traveling 
expenses. 


Models. 


Drafting. 


Miscella- 
neous. 


Architect 
fees. 


Total. 


Bills paid 


S161.30 ' SI SI 4 no 


31252. 80 
733. 19 


S5.38 
405. 35 


"S5," 066.00' 


S2 •>;J3 48 


Bills rendered, to be paid 


51.00 




6 189 54 









Grand total, 18,423.02. 



13 



APPENDIX C. 

FLOOR PLAN AND PERSPECTIVE, WALTER PLAN OF 
FEBRUARY 20, 1865. 

15 
S. Rep. 4388, 58-3 2 



'T~Si 



m I L. -i.ii||ii4 i " \ I vir 

1L J> , II » i» ^ ^ f^ III * t JT 




CO i 



II 



O ^ 



to io 
UJ s 



? 2 



o -^ 






*-W'^ 



= ;-♦ I 



:i 



■^ ^r 4 %i-i. 






w — -- 



a.. 



11 






^ > 



^:| 



— f 



> % 






1/ -. 






> f— 



'i*.' .V 









B D - 2a " 









.B Ja 'C 



ICT 78 

iT. AUGUSTINE 
^p\ FLA. 

■0 32084 



